The Trump administration for the moment won't look to renegotiate aviation agreements with Qatar and the United Arab Emirates, dealing a blow to U.S. airlines that want a harder line against what they feel are unfair subsidies being paid to state-run competitors. The State Department outlined its plans in a Tuesday morning meeting with industry and labor groups.

According to people familiar with the move, the administration has made a decision against taking more aggressive action. Instead, the Trump administration, which some U.S. airlines and their labor allies had hoped would be an ally in the fight, is mimicking the approach employed by former President Barack Obama — namely, continuing informal discussions, rather than opening a formal complaint called "consultations."

The decision caps months of speculation over how the Trump administration will approach so-called Open Skies agreements with the UAE and Qatar. Major airlines like Delta Air Lines, United Airlines and American Airlines have been pressuring the administration to take action, arguing they can’t compete with the Gulf carriers’ service. Some U.S. carriers stand in opposition, however — including JetBlue.


Trump administration holds off on penalizing Mideast airlines
https://www.politico.com/story/2017/12/ ... ies-218797

=

Good and rational move imo.

As has been shown ME3 airlines themselves not only directly contribute billions to the US economy and resultant US employment, but assist with economic activity in a host of related industries such as tourism across US cities.

I predicted this pre-election. For all the criticism of the Administration, he's the only President who ever owned an airline. I think he knows very well how cutthroat the airline business can be and went with Open Skies rather than an unraveling of the global aviation infrastructure just to give the U.S. carriers another shot at an Indian market they elected to pass over before nearly everybody on a.net was born.

Good. Lets move on.

Mr Bastian, Mr Parker, Mr Munoz, instead worry about your own airlines and competing on your own merits - the quality and service of product you offer consumers instead. The ME3 only thrive because they are able to give consumers something they want.

Oh and US3 they really want to worry about unlevel playing field maybe they should look at markets like China, but I guess that would inconvenient since they are deep in bed with their Chinese partners already.

In politics, it's ultimately all a numbers game. Whether the ME3 are, in fact, subsidized, or receive state aid and support, and compete unfairly, etc. doesn't really seem to motivate much public opinion. The number of votes attached to U.S. citizens who benefit from (1) the ME3's airfares between the U.S. and destinations around the world, and/or (2) the ME3's purchases of tens of billions of dollars of exported commercial aircraft, and/or (3) the ME3's employment of thousands of direct/indirect service workers at U.S. airports, far outweighs the number of votes attached to unionized workers at AA, Delta and United.

And beyond that, the ultimate determinant in much of public policy is consumer vs producer - in situations where the interests of one come into conflict with the interests of the other, public policy seems to indelibly bend towards consumers. So unionized workers at AA, Delta and United continue to (understandably, and reasonably) worry aloud about the threat to their jobs and livelihoods posed by competition from workers in other countries with less restrictive labor laws, and airlines effectively playing labor arbitrage with globally-sourced labor. But, in essence, the rest of American private sector workers can essentially respond with, "welcome to the party." It's only because of the unique nature of ownership and nationality restrictions that these forces have taken so long to reach U.S. network carrier workers. But it was always a matter of when, not if.

Again, right or wrong, agree or disagree - that just seems to me to be the inescapable, practical reality of this situation.

janders wrote:

Good. Lets move on.

Mr Bastian, Mr Parker, Mr Munoz, instead worry about your own airlines and competing on your own merits - the quality and service of product you offer consumers instead. The ME3 only thrive because they are able to give consumers something they want.

Oh and US3 they really want to worry about unlevel playing field maybe they should look at markets like China, but I guess that would inconvenient since they are deep in bed with their Chinese partners already.

Agreed, time to move on. Trump makes noise... Mostly.

Lightsaber

Bet it's not over.

Fact is that airline industry has historically always gone hand in hand with government policy and ownership.

Even today per ICAO nearly half of the globes airlines still have some form of state participation, so the concept that this is somehow a unique setup at against ME3 is nonsense. All the ME3 have done is produce something very well received by consumers at a very large scale which ends up worrying US3.

If the US3 really were so against the concept of government subsidy argument, they should go protest against China, Argentina, France, Italy, Egypt, Jordan, Turkey, South Africa, India, Thailand, Malaysia, New Zealand, Finland, Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Russia, Taiwan, Indonesia, Ethiopia, Poland, etc..

commavia wrote:

In politics, it's ultimately all a numbers game.

It really comes down to fact that any harm incurred by US airlines it rather meager in the comparison to the huge economic activity and consumer benefit the ME3 generates in return for the US..

janders wrote:

Mr Bastian, Mr Parker, Mr Munoz, instead worry about your own airlines and competing on your own merits - the quality and service of product you offer consumers instead. The ME3 only thrive because they are able to give consumers something they want.

Mr. Parker and Mr. Munoz have not put much effort into complaining about the ME3.

[twoid][/twoid]

IPFreely wrote:

janders wrote:

Mr Bastian, Mr Parker, Mr Munoz, instead worry about your own airlines and competing on your own merits - the quality and service of product you offer consumers instead. The ME3 only thrive because they are able to give consumers something they want.

Mr. Parker and Mr. Munoz have not put much effort into complaining about the ME3.

Really? Parker sure made a lot of noises when Qatar was looking to invest

I'm sure the guys and gals at Boeing are breathing a sigh of relief today,
especially those working on the 777X program.

commavia wrote:

In politics, it's ultimately all a numbers game. Whether the ME3 are, in fact, subsidized, or receive state aid and support, and compete unfairly, etc. doesn't really seem to motivate much public opinion. The number of votes attached to U.S. citizens who benefit from (1) the ME3's airfares between the U.S. and destinations around the world, and/or (2) the ME3's purchases of tens of billions of dollars of exported commercial aircraft, and/or (3) the ME3's employment of thousands of direct/indirect service workers at U.S. airports, far outweighs the number of votes attached to unionized workers at AA, Delta and United.

And beyond that, the ultimate determinant in much of public policy is consumer vs producer - in situations where the interests of one come into conflict with the interests of the other, public policy seems to indelibly bend towards consumers. So unionized workers at AA, Delta and United continue to (understandably, and reasonably) worry aloud about the threat to their jobs and livelihoods posed by competition from workers in other countries with less restrictive labor laws, and airlines effectively playing labor arbitrage with globally-sourced labor. But, in essence, the rest of American private sector workers can essentially respond with, "welcome to the party." It's only because of the unique nature of ownership and nationality restrictions that these forces have taken so long to reach U.S. network carrier workers. But it was always a matter of when, not if.

Again, right or wrong, agree or disagree - that just seems to me to be the inescapable, practical reality of this situation.

Spot on, and it's also worth pointing out the influence of those who are on the opposite side of the US3 on this issue - notably Boeing. When it comes to public opinion, I think it's fair to say that "but they buy our American-made aircraft" will always beat out "but they're potentially threatening our airline employee jobs".

Just to add a note, Delta Using the ME3 as an excuse not to go to India is a bunch of lies. ATL has become so busy with connecting traffic, the 777LR could easily be filled. Same with JFK! There is demand! India is only growing!

BenflysDTW wrote:

Just to add a note, Delta Using the ME3 as an excuse not to go to India is a bunch of lies. ATL has become so busy with connecting traffic, the 777LR could easily be filled. Same with JFK! There is demand! India is only growing!

Seems to me you forgot that a full plane can still be a money-loser.

BenflysDTW wrote:

Just to add a note, Delta Using the ME3 as an excuse not to go to India is a bunch of lies. ATL has become so busy with connecting traffic, the 777LR could easily be filled. Same with JFK! There is demand! India is only growing!

Surely you understand that a full plane does not equate to a profitable route yes? There's no need to get into it here as it's been discussed in no less than 100 other threads here on A.net, but it's extremely unlikely that any US3 carrier can make a nonstop between the US and India profitable.

There's also the threat of what happened to Canada when they refused to allow ME3 carriers more landing rights. The UAE evicted Canadian troops from a base in Dubai and initially forced Canadian citizens to obtain pricey visas to enter the country (although that was lifted three years later). I think this aspect plays just as big a part in the decision as Boeing aircraft orders do. I *do* believe that we would see both Delta and American offering at least one direct flight each to India if the restrictions they wanted were put in place, but while such new flights would surely create new jobs, it's very unclear if that gain would be greater than any loss of jobs due to new restrictions.

So this relates to the Open Skies. Is the approach related to taxing those airlines still going forward? If so the ME3s are not out of the woods yet.

janders wrote:

Good. Lets move on.

Mr Bastian, Mr Parker, Mr Munoz, instead worry about your own airlines and competing on your own merits - the quality and service of product you offer consumers instead. The ME3 only thrive because they are able to give consumers something they want.

Spot on!

BenflysDTW wrote:

Just to add a note, Delta Using the ME3 as an excuse not to go to India is a bunch of lies. ATL has become so busy with connecting traffic, the 777LR could easily be filled. Same with JFK! There is demand! India is only growing!

Not just India, but I've long wondered - why doesn't AA (just as an example) start daily DFW-DOH or ORD-DOH service with a 789? Or DFW/ORD-AUH? USA-subcontinent is where the ME3 have the biggest advantage over the US3, so instead of whining about competition, why not use the ME3's extensive subcontinental networks to your advantage? You're telling me US-originating traffic wouldn't choose to fly AA metal to DOH, for example? And earn the miles, maybe even upgrade, earn status, etc?

9w748capt wrote:

Not just India, but I've long wondered - why doesn't AA (just as an example) start daily DFW-DOH or ORD-DOH service with a 789? Or DFW/ORD-AUH?

Because the local markets are small and the ME3 have a significant cost advantage.

PayaLebar wrote:

janders wrote:

Good. Lets move on.

Mr Bastian, Mr Parker, Mr Munoz, instead worry about your own airlines and competing on your own merits - the quality and service of product you offer consumers instead. The ME3 only thrive because they are able to give consumers something they want.

Spot on!

9w748capt wrote:

BenflysDTW wrote:

Just to add a note, Delta Using the ME3 as an excuse not to go to India is a bunch of lies. ATL has become so busy with connecting traffic, the 777LR could easily be filled. Same with JFK! There is demand! India is only growing!

Not just India, but I've long wondered - why doesn't AA (just as an example) start daily DFW-DOH or ORD-DOH service with a 789? Or DFW/ORD-AUH? USA-subcontinent is where the ME3 have the biggest advantage over the US3, so instead of whining about competition, why not use the ME3's extensive subcontinental networks to your advantage? You're telling me US-originating traffic wouldn't choose to fly AA metal to DOH, for example? And earn the miles, maybe even upgrade, earn status, etc?

Right. That's what the alliances and all were designed to do. But they chose to even break that, even codeshares.

But to go back to their product, even if they were to run parallel flights with ME3 from say DFW-DOH pax would choose to fly the ME3 carrier because of what's on offer. The US3 know they can't compete on product with the ME3 based on their cost structure, and it would be too much of an investment to make in order to appeal to a certain region in the world when they seem to do fine elsewhere.

Doug et al are losing sleep tonight I'm sure. That tax option that the US government had floated was scary - and may resurface. But I don't know what else the US3 have left as a tool, now that the US administration has also gone the Obama way.

9w748capt wrote:

BenflysDTW wrote:

Just to add a note, Delta Using the ME3 as an excuse not to go to India is a bunch of lies. ATL has become so busy with connecting traffic, the 777LR could easily be filled. Same with JFK! There is demand! India is only growing!

Not just India, but I've long wondered - why doesn't AA (just as an example) start daily DFW-DOH or ORD-DOH service with a 789? Or DFW/ORD-AUH? USA-subcontinent is where the ME3 have the biggest advantage over the US3, so instead of whining about competition, why not use the ME3's extensive subcontinental networks to your advantage? You're telling me US-originating traffic wouldn't choose to fly AA metal to DOH, for example? And earn the miles, maybe even upgrade, earn status, etc?

That would be a sure way to burn through money.

commavia wrote:

9w748capt wrote:

Not just India, but I've long wondered - why doesn't AA (just as an example) start daily DFW-DOH or ORD-DOH service with a 789? Or DFW/ORD-AUH?

Because the local markets are small and the ME3 have a significant cost advantage.

Cost advantage yes - but which local markets are small? Sure, the market between any two city pairs may be small (I'm sure DFW-NAG is miniscule), but it's just my theory that leveraging the strength of the DFW hub on one end and the DOH or AUH hub on the other would enable even more connections on both ends - and for AA frequent flyers (for example) the opportunity to fly AA metal all the way to DOH as opposed to now. Having said that I acknowledge that I have zero business sense and no idea about how the finances of this would work, lol.

chepos wrote:

9w748capt wrote:

BenflysDTW wrote:

Just to add a note, Delta Using the ME3 as an excuse not to go to India is a bunch of lies. ATL has become so busy with connecting traffic, the 777LR could easily be filled. Same with JFK! There is demand! India is only growing!

Not just India, but I've long wondered - why doesn't AA (just as an example) start daily DFW-DOH or ORD-DOH service with a 789? Or DFW/ORD-AUH? USA-subcontinent is where the ME3 have the biggest advantage over the US3, so instead of whining about competition, why not use the ME3's extensive subcontinental networks to your advantage? You're telling me US-originating traffic wouldn't choose to fly AA metal to DOH, for example? And earn the miles, maybe even upgrade, earn status, etc?

That would be a sure way to burn through money.

Quite possibly, yes, but I'm sure a.net said the same for years about DFW-HKG, DFW-ICN, DFW-PEK, etc.

Trump would be crazy to hamper Boeing's sales efforts with the ME3 in particular the 778/9. and guess what, he's not crazy.

berari wrote:

But to go back to their product, even if they were to run parallel flights with ME3 from say DFW-DOH pax would choose to fly the ME3 carrier because of what's on offer. The US3 know they can't compete on product with the ME3 based on their cost structure, and it would be too much of an investment to make in order to appeal to a certain region in the world when they seem to do fine elsewhere.

I flew AA on DFW-HKG earlier this year on their MCE and found the hard product (i.e. the seats, the meals & the IFE) meeting the same standards as the Asian airlines. Also, they have Asian FAs onboard for the Cantonese and Mandarin speakers, which helps those speakers. Their soft product on the HKG flight is 85% compared to Asian FAs. Enthusiasm is certainly not as much as on MH, UL, GA etc.

Interesting! DL is saying the opposite. In fact today the put out a story saying the "Trump administration keeps pressure on Gulf Carriers." So I guess it depends who you ask as to what, if anything is being done!

So are we going to see the likes of UA back into DXB?? Rumour had it they were running 90%+ load factors when they cancelled the flight!!

Maybe Delta should have bought a few more Boeing aircraft....

Good news , time for the US3 to up their games and fly to more international destinations

ranbidaraxflo wrote:

So are we going to see the likes of UA back into DXB?? Rumour had it they were running 90%+ load factors when they cancelled the flight!!

Delta had about the same from their ATL flight. But remember, load factors don’t mean anything. It’s all about yield. But I still think that the flights were profitable. UA charges about 800 dollars round trip for their India flights from EWR in economy (in January). Would any experts here say that this is profitable? Thoughts?

PayaLebar wrote:

berari wrote:

But to go back to their product, even if they were to run parallel flights with ME3 from say DFW-DOH pax would choose to fly the ME3 carrier because of what's on offer. The US3 know they can't compete on product with the ME3 based on their cost structure, and it would be too much of an investment to make in order to appeal to a certain region in the world when they seem to do fine elsewhere.

I flew AA on DFW-HKG earlier this year on their MCE and found the hard product (i.e. the seats, the meals & the IFE) meeting the same standards as the Asian airlines. Also, they have Asian FAs onboard for the Cantonese and Mandarin speakers, which helps those speakers. Their soft product on the HKG flight is 85% compared to Asian FAs. Enthusiasm is certainly not as much as on MH, UL, GA etc.

Agreed - the ME3 are all bluster. EK doesn't even have lie-flat J in their 777s. EY Y is 10-across and cramped to all hell - I'd choose AA in a heartbeat over either, esp in MCE. QR Y is fine, but not anything special IMO. The ME3 survive largely off of a good reputation in the Indian community, not all of which is deserved IMO.

9w748capt wrote:

PayaLebar wrote:

berari wrote:

But to go back to their product, even if they were to run parallel flights with ME3 from say DFW-DOH pax would choose to fly the ME3 carrier because of what's on offer. The US3 know they can't compete on product with the ME3 based on their cost structure, and it would be too much of an investment to make in order to appeal to a certain region in the world when they seem to do fine elsewhere.

I flew AA on DFW-HKG earlier this year on their MCE and found the hard product (i.e. the seats, the meals & the IFE) meeting the same standards as the Asian airlines. Also, they have Asian FAs onboard for the Cantonese and Mandarin speakers, which helps those speakers. Their soft product on the HKG flight is 85% compared to Asian FAs. Enthusiasm is certainly not as much as on MH, UL, GA etc.

Agreed - the ME3 are all bluster. EK doesn't even have lie-flat J in their 777s. EY Y is 10-across and cramped to all hell - I'd choose AA in a heartbeat over either, esp in MCE. QR Y is fine, but not anything special IMO. The ME3 survive largely off of a good reputation in the Indian community, not all of which is deserved IMO.

Yep nothing better than crossing the atlantic in AA's beautiful 767's. Even low cost carriers like DY's 787s have IFE.

IPFreely wrote:

janders wrote:

Mr Bastian, Mr Parker, Mr Munoz, instead worry about your own airlines and competing on your own merits - the quality and service of product you offer consumers instead. The ME3 only thrive because they are able to give consumers something they want.

Mr. Parker and Mr. Munoz have not put much effort into complaining about the ME3.

Mr Delta Wannabe Parker will always be "Go with the Wind" as it blows thru ATL.

9w748capt wrote:

Agreed - the ME3 are all bluster. EK doesn't even have lie-flat J in their 777s. EY Y is 10-across and cramped to all hell - I'd choose AA in a heartbeat over either, esp in MCE. QR Y is fine, but not anything special IMO. The ME3 survive largely off of a good reputation in the Indian community, not all of which is deserved IMO.

Spot on!

Furthermore, I completely avoid the ME3 out of fear for a breakout of a war in a very volatile region.

pitbosflyer wrote:

Yep nothing better than crossing the atlantic in AA's beautiful 767's. Even low cost carriers like DY's 787s have IFE.

Well, my flight was a Trans Pacific flight and AA has to compete with the Asian carriers. I was on a 77W and not on a 763. And they certainly have seatback IFE.

9w748capt wrote:

PayaLebar wrote:

berari wrote:

But to go back to their product, even if they were to run parallel flights with ME3 from say DFW-DOH pax would choose to fly the ME3 carrier because of what's on offer. The US3 know they can't compete on product with the ME3 based on their cost structure, and it would be too much of an investment to make in order to appeal to a certain region in the world when they seem to do fine elsewhere.

I flew AA on DFW-HKG earlier this year on their MCE and found the hard product (i.e. the seats, the meals & the IFE) meeting the same standards as the Asian airlines. Also, they have Asian FAs onboard for the Cantonese and Mandarin speakers, which helps those speakers. Their soft product on the HKG flight is 85% compared to Asian FAs. Enthusiasm is certainly not as much as on MH, UL, GA etc.

Agreed - the ME3 are all bluster. EK doesn't even have lie-flat J in their 777s. EY Y is 10-across and cramped to all hell - I'd choose AA in a heartbeat over either, esp in MCE. QR Y is fine, but not anything special IMO. The ME3 survive largely off of a good reputation in the Indian community, not all of which is deserved IMO.

The new EK planes have lie flat seats, and most of the USA flights will get them, also the A380 have.
Not only the good reputation, but also the wide network to India, Pakistan....

pitbosflyer wrote:

Yep nothing better than crossing the atlantic in AA's beautiful 767's. Even low cost carriers like DY's 787s have IFE.

Why AA did not revamp the planes in so many years?? I have been in very old Md planes with wifi and IFE in some US airlines, so why not the same in the old B767's.

The US3 always talk about the ME3 but they don't do much in the whole Africa too, and for that market they have a much better position than anyone else, they could do some African routes from hubs like MIA, ATL, IAD.

9w748capt wrote:

PayaLebar wrote:

berari wrote:

But to go back to their product, even if they were to run parallel flights with ME3 from say DFW-DOH pax would choose to fly the ME3 carrier because of what's on offer. The US3 know they can't compete on product with the ME3 based on their cost structure, and it would be too much of an investment to make in order to appeal to a certain region in the world when they seem to do fine elsewhere.

I flew AA on DFW-HKG earlier this year on their MCE and found the hard product (i.e. the seats, the meals & the IFE) meeting the same standards as the Asian airlines. Also, they have Asian FAs onboard for the Cantonese and Mandarin speakers, which helps those speakers. Their soft product on the HKG flight is 85% compared to Asian FAs. Enthusiasm is certainly not as much as on MH, UL, GA etc.

Agreed - the ME3 are all bluster. EK doesn't even have lie-flat J in their 777s. EY Y is 10-across and cramped to all hell - I'd choose AA in a heartbeat over either, esp in MCE. QR Y is fine, but not anything special IMO. The ME3 survive largely off of a good reputation in the Indian community, not all of which is deserved IMO.

Man I sure hated this Etihad economy seat from IAD-AUH Trash carrier

PayaLebar wrote:

pitbosflyer wrote:

Yep nothing better than crossing the atlantic in AA's beautiful 767's. Even low cost carriers like DY's 787s have IFE.

Well, my flight was a Trans Pacific flight and AA has to compete with the Asian carriers. I was on a 77W and not on a 763. And they certainly have seatback IFE.

I know not all AA interiors are that bad. But just trying to show that AA isn't really competing effectively with the ME3 traffic crossing the Atlantic. The consumer is simply choosing the better option. Delta is doing a much better job of retaliating by at least improving their offering. And refurbishing planes.

jnev3289 wrote:

9w748capt wrote:

PayaLebar wrote:

I flew AA on DFW-HKG earlier this year on their MCE and found the hard product (i.e. the seats, the meals & the IFE) meeting the same standards as the Asian airlines. Also, they have Asian FAs onboard for the Cantonese and Mandarin speakers, which helps those speakers. Their soft product on the HKG flight is 85% compared to Asian FAs. Enthusiasm is certainly not as much as on MH, UL, GA etc.

Agreed - the ME3 are all bluster. EK doesn't even have lie-flat J in their 777s. EY Y is 10-across and cramped to all hell - I'd choose AA in a heartbeat over either, esp in MCE. QR Y is fine, but not anything special IMO. The ME3 survive largely off of a good reputation in the Indian community, not all of which is deserved IMO.

Man I sure hated this Etihad economy seat from IAD-AUH Trash carrier

Ooh wow - a PTV! So cool! Wow I've never seen that on an AA 777 or 787 before!

enilria wrote:

I predicted this pre-election. For all the criticism of the Administration, he's the only President who ever owned an airline. I think he knows very well how cutthroat the airline business can be and went with Open Skies rather than an unraveling of the global aviation infrastructure just to give the U.S. carriers another shot at an Indian market they elected to pass over before nearly everybody on a.net was born.

I think this was a decision taken by the departments of state and transportation rather than by Trump himself.

If something I imagine he would blame airlines now absorbed into the US3 for the failure of his airline (he started his luxury shuttle by badmouthing Panam and US airways eventually took over its planes when it got bankrupt). Furthermore the US3 have not been lobbying him as enthusiastically as Boeing has (whom would lose sales if the ME3 are punished by the US government).

9w748capt wrote:

Wait a minute - the US3's primary competition with the ME3 is NOT the TATL market. If that's what you think, you're completely clueless.

It's always said here that the US3 particularly dislikes the ME3's penetration of the Indian sub-continent. Now of course all those posters may be wrong.
But if they aren't then TATL very much comes into the equation as most of the passengers to/from India that they do have are currently connecting in Europe on to flights operated by their European JV partners.

That said, while AA does use the non-PTV 767s on TATL, they are rare visitors to any of their partners' hubs.

9w748capt wrote:

pitbosflyer wrote:

PayaLebar wrote:

Well, my flight was a Trans Pacific flight and AA has to compete with the Asian carriers. I was on a 77W and not on a 763. And they certainly have seatback IFE.

I know not all AA interiors are that bad. But just trying to show that AA isn't really competing effectively with the ME3 traffic crossing the Atlantic. The consumer is simply choosing the better option. Delta is doing a much better job of retaliating by at least improving their offering. And refurbishing planes.

Wait a minute - the US3's primary competition with the ME3 is NOT the TATL market. If that's what you think, you're completely clueless.

Yes I am aware. Most of the ME3 traffic goes to Asia and India. But the Trump Admin leaving open skies as is....will also lead to much more things like EK JFK - MXP. That is the kind of stuff terrifying US airlines. Also JFK- MXP just happens to be one of the routes AA runs their 767s on.

pitbosflyer wrote:

9w748capt wrote:

pitbosflyer wrote:

I know not all AA interiors are that bad. But just trying to show that AA isn't really competing effectively with the ME3 traffic crossing the Atlantic. The consumer is simply choosing the better option. Delta is doing a much better job of retaliating by at least improving their offering. And refurbishing planes.

Wait a minute - the US3's primary competition with the ME3 is NOT the TATL market. If that's what you think, you're completely clueless.

Yes I am aware. Most of the ME3 traffic goes to Asia and India. But the Trump Admin leaving open skies as is....will also lead to much more things like EK JFK - MXP. That is the kind of stuff terrifying US airlines. Also JFK- MXP just happens to be one of the routes AA runs their 767s on.

If you're aware, then don't make ridiculous irrelevant comparisons. Yes AA's 767s are a disgrace, particularly in the back. But that has absolutely zilch to do with anything. That one example of the US3 having an inferior product is totally irrelevantin the grand scheme.

Andy33 wrote:

9w748capt wrote:

Wait a minute - the US3's primary competition with the ME3 is NOT the TATL market. If that's what you think, you're completely clueless.

It's always said here that the US3 particularly dislikes the ME3's penetration of the Indian sub-continent. Now of course all those posters may be wrong.
But if they aren't then TATL very much comes into the equation as most of the passengers to/from India that they do have are currently connecting in Europe on to flights operated by their European JV partners.

That said, while AA does use the non-PTV 767s on TATL, they are rare visitors to any of their partners' hubs.

Right, but pax connecting to India via LHR/AMS/FRA/etc are not transatlantic passengers per se. No one is flying DFW-DOH-LHR that I know of. The other poster is trying to suggest that the US3 and ME3 compete on tatl routes. Which with the exception of JFK-MXP, they don't.

9w748capt wrote:

Andy33 wrote:

9w748capt wrote:

Wait a minute - the US3's primary competition with the ME3 is NOT the TATL market. If that's what you think, you're completely clueless.

It's always said here that the US3 particularly dislikes the ME3's penetration of the Indian sub-continent. Now of course all those posters may be wrong.
But if they aren't then TATL very much comes into the equation as most of the passengers to/from India that they do have are currently connecting in Europe on to flights operated by their European JV partners.

That said, while AA does use the non-PTV 767s on TATL, they are rare visitors to any of their partners' hubs.

Right, but pax connecting to India via LHR/AMS/FRA/etc are not transatlantic passengers per se. No one is flying DFW-DOH-LHR that I know of. The other poster is trying to suggest that the US3 and ME3 compete on tatl routes. Which with the exception of JFK-MXP, they don't.

No I'm trying to say people on their way to India (that are using a US airline) are flying a TATL flight to connect in Europe before continuing onward with the European Partner Airline. The experience with AA on the TATL leg is less than ideal in comparison with connecting in the Middle East with a ME3 Carrier. AA has new 777s on some routes but the others are A330s and 767s with subpar economy offerings. US airlines can cry wolf all they want, but actually trying to be more competitive with their offering would potentially help them actually compete.

pitbosflyer wrote:

9w748capt wrote:

Andy33 wrote:

It's always said here that the US3 particularly dislikes the ME3's penetration of the Indian sub-continent. Now of course all those posters may be wrong.
But if they aren't then TATL very much comes into the equation as most of the passengers to/from India that they do have are currently connecting in Europe on to flights operated by their European JV partners.

That said, while AA does use the non-PTV 767s on TATL, they are rare visitors to any of their partners' hubs.

Right, but pax connecting to India via LHR/AMS/FRA/etc are not transatlantic passengers per se. No one is flying DFW-DOH-LHR that I know of. The other poster is trying to suggest that the US3 and ME3 compete on tatl routes. Which with the exception of JFK-MXP, they don't.

No I'm trying to say people on their way to India (that are using a US airline) are flying a TATL flight to connect in Europe before continuing onward with the European Partner Airline. The experience with AA on the TATL leg is less than ideal in comparison with connecting in the Middle East with a ME3 Carrier. AA has new 777s on some routes but the others are A330s and 767s with subpar economy offerings. US airlines can cry wolf all they want, but actually trying to be more competitive with their offering would potentially help them actually compete.

First off passengers transiting LHR on the way to India are not tatl passengers. They are in transit only.

And regardless of that, AA doesn't fly the 763 to LHR anymore. So regardless of how bad that product is, that had nothing to do with the US3 supposedly having an inferior product to to up against the ME3.

The US-India and US-Europe markets are totally different.

9w748capt wrote:

Andy33 wrote:

9w748capt wrote:

Wait a minute - the US3's primary competition with the ME3 is NOT the TATL market. If that's what you think, you're completely clueless.

It's always said here that the US3 particularly dislikes the ME3's penetration of the Indian sub-continent. Now of course all those posters may be wrong.
But if they aren't then TATL very much comes into the equation as most of the passengers to/from India that they do have are currently connecting in Europe on to flights operated by their European JV partners.

That said, while AA does use the non-PTV 767s on TATL, they are rare visitors to any of their partners' hubs.

Right, but pax connecting to India via LHR/AMS/FRA/etc are not transatlantic passengers per se. No one is flying DFW-DOH-LHR that I know of. The other poster is trying to suggest that the US3 and ME3 compete on tatl routes. Which with the exception of JFK-MXP, they don't.

I agree that they aren't passengers whose sole purpose in flying is to make a transatlantic journey. But AA will offer a passenger wanting to fly DFW-BLR a flight from DFW to LHR (which might actually be operated by BA) and a BA flight from LHR to BLR. Emirates will offer a flight from DFW to DXB and a flight from DXB to BLR, all on their own metal. Nobody makes a non-stop flight, you're going to have to connect somewhere. The DFW-LHR flights are undoubtedly transatlantic and the majority of the passengers will be travelling to Europe, but the Indian connecting passengers are a significant contribution to the revenue of this purely transatlantic route, and AA gets revenue even if the flight to LHR is operated by BA, thanks to the JV.
I really don't understand your point about DFW-DOH-LHR at all.

9w748capt wrote:

First off passengers transiting LHR on the way to India are not tatl passengers. They are in transit only.

And regardless of that, AA doesn't fly the 763 to LHR anymore. So regardless of how bad that product is, that had nothing to do with the US3 supposedly having an inferior product to to up against the ME3.

The US-India and US-Europe markets are totally different.

You make a compelling case for not restricting the ME3, although I suspect you don't mean to.

I still remember those awful KL/NW rust buckets serving India in the pre-ME3 US service days. Not to mention the legendary frigid LH "service" in Y. Real bottom of the barrel stuff.

It's changed a bit since the ME3 went TATL, hasn't it? PTVs in LH Y, BA and LH offering "cultural training" to crews operating to India and so on.

Pity the same can't be said for US-EU routes. Much higher yielding. Much poorer service. On my last flight on a US carrier - an end-2015 TATL UA 767 that evidently hadn't been cleaned in a decade, with the added bonus of no PTVs - suggests that the US carriers have some ways to go.

Perhaps the competitive pressure from the ME3 will accelerate that improvement.

ElPistolero wrote:

You make a compelling case for not restricting the ME3, although I suspect you don't mean to.

I still remember those awful KL/NW rust buckets serving India in the pre-ME3 US service days. Not to mention the legendary frigid LH "service" in Y. Real bottom of the barrel stuff.

It's changed a bit since the ME3 went TATL, hasn't it? PTVs in LH Y, BA and LH offering "cultural training" to crews operating to India and so on.

Pity the same can't be said for US-EU routes. Much higher yielding. Much poorer service. On my last flight on a US carrier - an end-2015 TATL UA 767 that evidently hadn't been cleaned in a decade, with the added bonus of no PTVs - suggests that the US carriers have some ways to go.

Perhaps the competitive pressure from the ME3 will accelerate that improvement.

Not sure about UA and AA, but DL already addressing this issue by enlisting 9W on India-Europe routes there is no need to depend on its European partners' food and cultural awareness.

Assuming DL unions go along with the plan, VS can always provide better service on TATL routes.

Is it my wishful thinking? Maybe!!!